Just received my lens back from sigma calibration yesterday. While the lens was better, it was still off. My experience matches those of badlydrawnboy. It was able to hit focus at very short distances but when distances grew further, the amount of front focus was greater. For the price of the lens, I was not able to accept this. While the lens was terrific when the focus hit, it just wasn't hitting consistently at far and close distances. For this reason, I sent the lens back to BHphoto today for a full refund. I really wanted to like the lens but unfortunately, things didn't work out.

On the bright side, I will probably use the money to pick up an ultrawide and try out the sigma 30 1.4 instead for approximately the same price of the sigma 35.

RogerC11 wrote:
Just received my lens back from sigma calibration yesterday. While the lens was better, it was still off. My experience matches those of badlydrawnboy. It was able to hit focus at very short distances but when distances grew further, the amount of front focus was greater. For the price of the lens, I was not able to accept this. While the lens was terrific when the focus hit, it just wasn't hitting consistently at far and close distances. For this reason, I sent the lens back to BHphoto today for a full refund. I really wanted to like the lens but unfortunately, things didn't work out.

On the bright side, I will probably use the money to pick up an ultrawide and try out the sigma 30 1.4 instead for approximately the same price of the sigma 35. ...Show more →

What about your camera body? I am using one with a 5D3 and having no issues whatsover. It's sharp at a distance at 1.4. In fact I have never had a 1.4 lens that was cable of taking usable distant shots at 1.4. I know that doesn't solve your problem but after calibration at Sigma I would consider looking elsewhere.

geniousc wrote:
What about your camera body? I am using one with a 5D3 and having no issues whatsover. It's sharp at a distance at 1.4. In fact I have never had a 1.4 lens that was cable of taking usable distant shots at 1.4. I know that doesn't solve your problem but after calibration at Sigma I would consider looking elsewhere.

gene
Im using a t2i so no MA adjust feature. The problem was not only present at 1.4 but everything up to f4 i didnt bother trying more stopped down than that because i hardly shoot there.

Definitely not the camera body in my case. I just got my 5D3 back from Canon. They repaired it and everything is up to spec. My other lenses (Canon) work perfectly. This is definitely an issue with the Sigma. Invertalon's theories make sense to me, but they're little consolation.

Peacekpr wrote:
So much for Sigma's new quality control. Face it; a Sigma will always be "just a Sigma". If you want the best glass consistently, you go for L glass.

I'm at that point now. I know others have good, reliable copies of this and other Sigma lenses. But I've had terrible luck with them. Yet all of my Canon lenses AF great right out of the box, and only get better with MFA. Maybe I've been unusually unlucky with Sigma, and unusually lucky with Canon, but I'm tired of all this focus testing and calibration. I just want the lens to work!

Thing is, I know the Sigma is sharper but the 35L I used to have was plenty sharp for people shots — which is my primary subject matter.

Invertalon wrote:
OK guys, for what it is worth to some of you... I emailed CPS due to the MA shift I was getting between lighting sources. Not with distance, but light. Both copies I have tried of the Sigma 35 have performed identical... Great at any distance, MFD to infinity... 0MA 90% of the time on my 5D3... But sometimes indoors, requires around +8 to be sharp again.

I got a call back from CPS just now in regards to my email about the focus shift. I was told that behavior is perfectly normal for any camera body to exhibit, because the white balance temperature has a direct relation to the AF performance of the lens. Since the AF system is using light to achieve focus, the color temperature is very critical and can definitely cause shift between lighting sources. Fast lenses are more noticeable, obviously, due to the very shallow depth of field. f/2.8 lenses and up will not show nearly as well. The main point here is to MA in conditions you will be shooting with and adjust as required. One of the main reasons for the ability to MA, and not just to fix lens calibration issues

But he did stress to me that it is perfectly normal to see this type of behavior, especially indoors with complex color temperatures....Show more →

This is my experience as well. I once compared a 5DM3 and D800 side-by-side with each system's 35mm f/1.4 and both exhibited almost the identical AF shift in tungsten CFL vs 5000K CFL, down to a single hash mark on a LensAlign target.

I finally pulled the trigger on the Sigma this week.
It has been so cold here I have not been able to take it out.
But after all the tests (about 200 shots) that I have done at home on my newly acquired 6D, I cannot fault this lens, it is sharp, it DOES Focus and I did not have to micro adjust it. I am not a pixel peeper, I don't shoot brick walls either and may be I don't know what to look for, but this thing seems to be spot on at 1.4 from what I can tell.
Paired with the high ISO capability of the 6D, it seems to be an awesome combination.

didierv wrote:
I finally pulled the trigger on the Sigma this week.
It has been so cold here I have not been able to take it out.
But after all the tests (about 200 shots) that I have done at home on my newly acquired 6D, I cannot fault this lens, it is sharp, it DOES Focus and I did not have to micro adjust it. I am not a pixel peeper, I don't shoot brick walls either and may be I don't know what to look for, but this thing seems to be spot on at 1.4 from what I can tell.
Paired with the high ISO capability of the 6D, it seems to be an awesome combination....Show more →

Don't misunderstand what people are posting here. They aren't saying that all Sigma lenses are dogs. This particular lens seems to have a far greater rate of unsatisfied owners than one would expect in a high end lens.

The majority of us have owned Sigmas. Of the 4 I've owned only one was a keeper. Compare that to the Canon L series. I own 6 of them now and every one of them was outstanding right out of the box.

So, if you can get over the sticker shock of white lenses they are likely a better choice.

I note that we keep the Sigma 18-200 DC OS to run on our 7D when we don't want to draw attention. It's not bad for food photograph either. Even that lens originally failed when purchased.

jojomon11 wrote:
Bashing a product for something 5 years ago is wrong, I am sure they have heard the peoples complaints and have done something about unlike some of the larger brand names.

For some reason bashing Canon on Canon forum is even more popular I believe this Sigma lens is good and we all do, should we just be happy and be less sensitive about? If this lens is good it will not automatically fix any other with af problems.

To me, the Sigma 35 1.4 is no different than the Canon 24 1.4 II which also had plenty of issues out of the gate. For those that were around here when the 1D3 was introduced, the noise was deafening about how bad it was. All of a sudden the 1D3 is now a great camera. So be it on the internet. The Sigma will be great very soon if not already depending on who you ask.http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-35mm-f-1.4-EX-DG-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx

Why do we use the word bad for good Let's review....
75+% say it's a great lens, I don't have one for my 1D...but do shoot with the Nikon mount "A"
It's unfreakin' believable. FX/DX, it's insane. Let the MAJORITY be intoxicated with the IQ/AF, it won't kill ya

So far at min focusing distance the sigma is front focusing big time and will require somewhere between +6 to + 15 I would guess.

Edit: have mine at +10. I just adjusted it while shooting hand held and seeing if it focused where I pointed it. Was definitely front focusing. +10 seems to have done the trick. This at close distances, I didn't really test it beyond 5 ft.

Perhaps against my better judgment I went for a 3rd copy. This time, it is very close to being right on at all focus distances with a +5 MFA. The only problem is that it front-focuses by a few millimeters at MFD. For example, if I take a close-up of my toddler's face and focus on her eye, her eyebrow and bridge of her nose will be sharp, but the eye will be slightly OOF.

I don't take close-ups of the face with a 35mm lens very often, but I'm still irritated by the fact that it consistently front-focuses at MFD. I'm going to try increasing the MFA to +8-10 today and see if that can solve the FF problem at MFD without causing a back-focus problem at other focal distances.

Question: is this the sort of problem that Sigma could fix if I sent the lens and my 5D3 to them? It's frustrating to be so close to finally having a good copy of this lens. When it hits, which is most of the time, it's just as amazing as everyone says it is.